cashbacklover wrote:Will try and explain laterrichard@imutual wrote:What's the reason for that?cashbacklover wrote:I did not wish/do not wish for my shares to go back into I-Mutual "pot".
cashbacklover wrote:Will try and explain laterrichard@imutual wrote:What's the reason for that?cashbacklover wrote:I did not wish/do not wish for my shares to go back into I-Mutual "pot".
Subsequent forum postings arose following this questionrichard@imutual wrote:cbl - what value would you put on your own personal shareholding?
Err, no. One statement explains how, if we offer further shares to entice people to do things that add value to the company, existing shareholders shouldn't be concerned about this diluting their holdings. And they definitely shouldn't be concerned if one member offers to give up their already-earned shares. No contradiction whatsoever!Isnt this a contradiction?
I think you're erecting straw men throughout this thread. Other members' concern about giving shares for posting has no relevance to this; I'm confident they wouldn't be at all concerned if you chose to give your shares backcashbacklover wrote:Other respected members have commented about how you are distributing the shares – effects on the forum etc and I have no wish for my shareholding to be recycled and redistributed in the way you distribute I-Mutual shares and/or subsidise the issuing of new I-Mutual shares to be issued in the way you distribute I-Mutual shares
Actually, you made an unsolicited offer to give them away. I offered £10 afterwards. And as I've explained, it has no effect on me personally whether they go to charity or back into the potyou now see an opportunity to claw back 15000+ for 10.00
I haven't said no to your suggestion; just trying to find a way of accommodating it that involves less work and maximises the charity benefit. You still haven't really justified your objection to my proposal, and by withdrawing your offer only a day after making it I can only conclude you have realised the folly of your ways; that the shares could well be valuable after all!it appears to be too much of problem I will withdraw it and keep things as they are
richard@imutual wrote:[ I can only conclude you have realised the folly of your ways; that the shares could well be valuable after all!
No, the reasons for occasionally offering less than 100% cashback have been spelt out several times, and you're throwing yet another diversion into the discussion. And why would you think I'd agree to any additional conditions when you're only bargaining chip is shares that you consider to be worthlesscashbacklover wrote:Forum promise that 100% Cashback will always apply to all new no spends/easy cash listings added by I-Mutual
Ok finerichard@imutual wrote:[Let's just stick with your original proposal then. I will work out the best way to accommodate it, so long as I have your word that you're not going to backtrack on the offer?
I would rather have the 10.00 + lifetime I-Mutual, 100% Cashback pledge on all new no spend cashback offers that are added to the site as those who know me well will believegarindan wrote:Why CBL can't just admit he likes the idea of having the shares in case they do eventually turn out to be worth something in the end, as a free gamble, is beyond me. Otherwise it is a total no-brainer to let the charity have a tenner and hand back the shares.
Andrew
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 9 guests